Some of the privacy concerns here are based on the assumption that the camera automatically uploads everything it takes on the internet. It doesn't. The onus is still on the user to select which photos to upload and bear responsibility for whatever privacy issues it begets.
Also, no one's forced to buy this. :D
timccr: Machines can't think, have no imagination and don't understand what a sub text is. Rather like the people who came up with this idea.
I suspect your creativity is also lacking if you can't think of ways to use this.
Petrogel: Exactly what the market was missing, one more useless device !!!!!! OMG !!!! what is gonna come next ?
Exactly what the comment thread was missing, one more useless comment !!!!!! OMG !!!! what is gonna come next ?
Nishi Drew: "Hey guys look what pictures I.... I mean my camera took"Take the person out of the equation and photographs lose so much value.
Now, if we're talking security, journalism, sports then capturing that moment is more important for certain people. But man, it's enough that cameras have become all auto exposure super stabilization fast focusing devices that just need a trigger pull, when the perspective, composition and any artistic expression is all that's really needed, and that's what a camera like this take away...
Then again, you're not obliged to replace your DSLR with this device. Why the assumption that only your values on what a photographer should and shouldn't be is valid?
Vitruvius: I am NOT a legal beagle, and I hate getting harrased in public while taking a picture of a building, BUT ...
I see legal implications written all over this (besides trying to get through customs at the airport).
Google street view had to automate software to go through ALL their images and blurr out faces and license pllates. It is actually funny because even the faces on billboards are blurred out.
What happens when people start posting video blogs or live visual diaries and somebodies wife sees their husband with their X?
You ARE responsible for what you post online and it is almost irretrievable. The number of people trying to erase their digital past is growing.
For a history of this idea see Steve Mann / cyberman;
And don't be surprised to be assaulted...
Your concerns are valid, though I guess the responsibility still falls upon the user to pick and choose which photos should and shouldn't be uploaded. If there are 1000 photographs to sort out each day, though, that might be too tedious for most people. :D
I suspect that Hasselblad is losing sales at an accelerated pace, which is why they sought out a partnership with Sony.
Between the high MP 35mm DSLRs and possibly Pentax's relatively budget-priced MF DSLR and Leica's S camera, sales must be dipping in Hasselblad land.
Polyfem: I respect the disappointment expressed by purists and enthusiasts, but I have to look at this camera as a functional and aesthetical object, and I see a very cool and well-designed camera with state-of-the-art technique. Yes, it's overpriced, but only in the camera-business. I have a passion for mechanical watches and in that field you won't get much for that price. You may easily pay, say 20 K $ for a watch just telling the hours, minutes and seconds. True, when you look at the Lunar you wouldn't buy it because of its technical functionality - it's primarily a luxury object, a device for those who want something different from the uniform black rubberclad crowd. Hasselblad degrading themselves? I find a collaboration between high-tech Sony and high prestigeous H a very good idea for both companies. / Sven
I don't see how that's well-designed, but I guess our functional slants differ on that one. It's not even a price issue, as I think Leica rangefinders are nicely-designed cameras.
nekrosoft13: Will have non-removable battery, memory will be non-removable, will use a totally different unique plug, $50 adapter will be available. If held incorrectly will fail to work, in that case a case will be required. Some times will burn on people pocket. And will be manufactured in factory were people comit suicides. Will cost 2+ times more then normal product.
That sounds like a typical apple product.
Rich, it's only valuable because of the excellent marketing team there that created a huge cult following for it. Otherwise, what they have aren't anything groundbreaking. A couple of innovations here and there, then it's mostly patent trolling.
Arn: I hope they improved the incredibly stupid "auto" ISO of the XZ-1, which had a range of 100-200... In other ways the XZ-1 is a very good camera and much sharper than for example the Canon S95 (I own both). Gotta love the fast lens.
Yeah, I don't know why they didn't let users set the Auto ISO range for the XZ-1. Otherwise, I'm happy with that camera.
peevee1: I like Oly in general, but at $600... you must be mad not to prefer Sony RX100 instead. XZ-2 should be $300, for price-conscious who cannot spring a little higher for much better cameras. Even $500 Pana LX-7 and Samsung EX2F are better cameras, and cheaper.
And you are basing these on just reading spec sheets? Amusing way to gauge cameras.
peevee1: "In addition to superior still image quality, the 1080p Full HD Movie capability with stereo sound captures movies in the best quality currently available in compact cameras. "
That is simple not true. Looks like the press-release was written before RX100 either. Another era, simpler times... :)
Poor shmucks caught with their pants down...
It's marketing speak. Any camera company's marketing team says as much about their products. It's you whose pants are already down with people laughing at you.
shaocaholica: At least its small(er) than other FF DSLRs. I'm really looking forward to more size reductions of FF cameras.
Anastigmat: Agreed. I just wish future pros will see that smaller bodies can be just as tough as big cameras. Pentax and Olympus have shown that it can be done. I would very much welcome smaller FF bodies in the future.
sandy b: Look to the right at the Top cameras chart.
The top cameras only reflect the click throughs a camera posting receives, nothing else. If you're so naive to believe such a chart, you probably think the Rebels and D3xxx cameras are NOT their respective companies' top sellers.
Münchhausen: The Price Point is ridiculous, for the 6d As well As for the Nikon D600. We're broke in Europe, and we will simply not shell out 2000€ for a entry level FF. Greed is good, but it is killing economy right now. Where is the camera manufacturer that would offer a 1500$/€ FF camera? Sony could have done it, but they didn't have the cojones for it, or Pentax, but they don't have the will either. I won't by anything of this, and even not the RX1 with its ridiculous price. vale
I think it has been posted numerous times already that your high tariffs in the EU region causes prices to inflate over there. Again, yours is a simple case of "I can't afford this, so I BLAME CAMERA MANUFACTURERS". Sorry, no one really pities you. FF cameras are never gonna be life-or-death necessities, except for pro photographers, and even then, they can justify the cost for the 6D. Nor will camera companies feel the loss of your $1500 business loss. Don't worry, Canon still makes something for you, it's called the Powershot A800.
Ben O Connor: Thats more versatile than P100 and much easier to carry than P7100. And actually P7100 was a very late excuse to ones, who already bought P7000.
Also improoved optical specs, longest zoom range on its class.
I see that there are two rivals now to send to Olympus XZ-1 to history.
Panasonic LX-7 with bright lens and video specs.Nikon P7700 with a versitality of highest tele zoom and streo built in mic. brightest screen, and pocketable.
Very well done Nikon.
ps: I personally believe that Sony RX100 and Canon G1X are just miss matched models. They are both awfull expensive and they can´t really helps with none of their specs.
That the XZ-1 lasted this long as a competitive camera (and it still is, actually, depending on one's needs) is commendable. Word on the grapevine is that an updated version is coming our way as Photokina nears, so depending on what Olympus comes out with, the P7700 may still see some tough competition (the G1X already presents a threat in the here and now).
That said, I'm interested to see how this camera performs. As someone who gives all cameras a fair shake, I'm hoping this one performs well. Specs-wise, it looks good already.
Henry Falkner: To me, this is the most sensible approach to compacts with a larger sensor. Settings that I regularly use on my P&S are on two dials, you can see immediately what they do. The main function dial is recessed from the back, where you cannot accidentally turn it. You get a hotshoe as well as an internal flash. A 7x zoom is better than a kick in the bum. And from the business end it does not look like a rehashed 35mm rnagefinder camera. I have not used an optical viewfinder for a long time. You can turn the articulated LCD in sunlight for best viewing. This is the first of the higher quality compacts that I find both attractive and useful in its concept.
Micdair, it doesn't present a trouble for people who know how to work with such limitations.
johnsaxon: I had to return the Sony RX100 that I bought because the close-focus figure of 2" was very deceptive. once you zoom the lens from its 28mm wide-angle setting the close-focusing completely disappears and the camera has absolutely no macro capability. (how about 15.5" at 50mm?) My point here is that now I'm paranoid and will not consider any camera until I can find out detailed info about the macro focusing AT ALL FOCAL LENGTHS. I doubt that Nikon would pull something as weird as what Sony did, but I'm just sayin'.
Well, you could also make do with Raynox lenses, but yeah, it's something extra to carry.
jake werner: I can't take cameras without viewfinders seriously.... even Nikon. Just not practical on bright days. When are the manufactures going to learn.
Demanding for a viewfinder does not denote sophistication in a photographer. There are plenty shooters out there using DSLRs the way they would P&Ses, and iPhone shooters taking superb photos. The viewfinder is useful, yes, but it certainly won't stop someone from being a true sophisticated photographer, one who actually cares about photos and not ticked boxes in a feature list.
While I like Olympus' m4/3 offerings and the XZ-1, I'm disappointed that they chose to cripple their superzooms by taking away the ASM modes older Olympus superzooms used to have. A shame, really.
My only disappointment with this is that it isn't weather-sealed. Yes, that's probably impossible with a superzoom, but hey, a guy can dream. :D
I held my breath when I saw the camera photos. I thought it also had the K-5's toughness. :P